"At present, the Russian Navy is far behind that of the USSR in the number of ships with good fighting capacity."

"The current number of ships is sufficient for performing anti-piracy duty in the Gulf of Aden and for periodical appearance in important parts of the world ocean to demonstrate the Russian flag but keeping ships in areas vitally important for Russia's interests on a permanent basis is beyond Russia's potential so far.

Nevertheless, the currently made efforts allow to solve many problems."

Or are they practicing for intervention on behalf of the allawites in Syria ?

At least the exercise is about to create a safe point on enemy territory and use it to push into enemy territory afterwards; air cover, ships, landing missions, and so on.

Interesting .... .

Quoting: ^àTOn^

For the time being there is no sign of a deal on Syria. Russia and China maintain their position. So I don't think the US would trade Georgia for Syria but if a major war starts in the Middle East then Russia could invade Georgia. It would be fait accompli and the US could be too busy to react.

Quoting: Vlad Tepes

Why is Georgia so important for Russia, that they would risk a confrontation with the US, and the life of their soldiers ?

“Food prices rose again sharply, threatening the health and well-being of millions of people,” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said in a statement on Thursday from the bank’s Washington headquarters. “Africa and the Middle East are particularly vulnerable, but so are people in other countries where the prices of grains have gone up abruptly.”

I made a thread, in 2011, concerning this. It was even pinned. Normally my threads disapear within 2 minutes, I couldn't believe it.

Anyways, the food prices are going to rise. That doesn't affect me, nor you. In the extreme case you eat a steak less, or pay more for the burger.

But, in the countries, like those we are watching on this thread, and others in that region, will be affected and that, very grave. Up to the point that it could get life threatening for any regime or government or who and whatever is on the head of the state.

It also affects the rice basket in asia .... .

This is no shit, there is a big chance that in large areas on this planet people will be on a diet.

“Food prices rose again sharply, threatening the health and well-being of millions of people,” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said in a statement on Thursday from the bank’s Washington headquarters. “Africa and the Middle East are particularly vulnerable, but so are people in other countries where the prices of grains have gone up abruptly.”

I made a thread, in 2011, concerning this. It was even pinned. Normally my threads disapear within 2 minutes, I couldn't believe it.

Anyways, the food prices are going to rise. That doesn't affect me, nor you. In the extreme case you eat a steak less, or pay more for the burger.

But, in the countries, like those we are watching on this thread, and others in that region, will be affected and that, very grave. Up to the point that it could get life threatening for any regime or government or who and whatever is on the head of the state.

It also affects the rice basket in asia .... .

This is no shit, there is a big chance that in large areas on this planet people will be on a diet.

Quoting: ^àTOn^

And that will drive politics and for planners today to start planning.

“Food prices rose again sharply, threatening the health and well-being of millions of people,” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said in a statement on Thursday from the bank’s Washington headquarters. “Africa and the Middle East are particularly vulnerable, but so are people in other countries where the prices of grains have gone up abruptly.”

I made a thread, in 2011, concerning this. It was even pinned. Normally my threads disapear within 2 minutes, I couldn't believe it.

Anyways, the food prices are going to rise. That doesn't affect me, nor you. In the extreme case you eat a steak less, or pay more for the burger.

But, in the countries, like those we are watching on this thread, and others in that region, will be affected and that, very grave. Up to the point that it could get life threatening for any regime or government or who and whatever is on the head of the state.

It also affects the rice basket in asia .... .

This is no shit, there is a big chance that in large areas on this planet people will be on a diet.

Quoting: ^àTOn^

And that will drive politics and for planners today to start planning.

Quoting: ^àTOn^

i dunno -- politicians these days don't tend ot plan all that far in advance

Filling up? As in tens of thousands or a couple of guys at our language schools. As I was taught early on, believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see. In the Marines we would occasionally train with a few foreign nationals now and then...like 6-10, not hundreds or even tens. I don't believe America is filling up with Russian troops in any way, shape or form. But then again, I don't believe in fairies or democrats either...just my two cents

I know the voices aren't real, but man do they come up with some great ideas!Semper Fi USMCVery much an Occams Razor kind of guy.Bridging the gap between "It can't happen to us" and "We're all going to die".

“Food prices rose again sharply, threatening the health and well-being of millions of people,” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said in a statement on Thursday from the bank’s Washington headquarters. “Africa and the Middle East are particularly vulnerable, but so are people in other countries where the prices of grains have gone up abruptly.”

I made a thread, in 2011, concerning this. It was even pinned. Normally my threads disapear within 2 minutes, I couldn't believe it.

Anyways, the food prices are going to rise. That doesn't affect me, nor you. In the extreme case you eat a steak less, or pay more for the burger.

But, in the countries, like those we are watching on this thread, and others in that region, will be affected and that, very grave. Up to the point that it could get life threatening for any regime or government or who and whatever is on the head of the state.

It also affects the rice basket in asia .... .

This is no shit, there is a big chance that in large areas on this planet people will be on a diet.

Quoting: ^àTOn^

And that will drive politics and for planners today to start planning.

Quoting: ^àTOn^

i dunno -- politicians these days don't tend ot plan all that far in advance

Quoting: Swinburnian

True, but take egypt: today 6x million people, in 2020 8x million people, no industry, no basics to participate in global trade, no exports, no nothing, no work.

What means do they have to handle that ? Prices are going to go up, thats a fact.

The question is: Even if there would be the best ever champion president, he cannot handle that. And egypt is even better off than others.

I think the prices of basic food, is one of those excelarators, not talked about, because we don't care, but definitly an excelarators.

My opinion remains that Israeli concerns will be far more focused and immediate. I maintain my belief that Iran is not the primary short term target of choice for the IDF.

I think it is in their interests to remove the 'clear and present danger' of Hezbollah first. While some concern is certainly valid for the NE border as well as their southern border, somewhat diminished in recent days, the primary threat is within Lebanon. Remove it and the card house falls down.

Deployments of new systems center around the Hezbollah threat and it is far more doable than a total regional war. Some will believe that attacking Hezbollah must equal a regional conflagration, but I do not believe other states would join the fray if it were a convincing Israeli offensive. The concern then is whether Israel CAN convincingly engage with minimal political fall out and can win. The last round was a draw.

Anything short of liquidation of Hezbollah seems outside the norm of Israeli strategy and while boldness is a signature theme, they also normally choose smaller far more executable quick operations that maximize gains and minimize risk. Total war is not a choice I expect them to make. An attack on Iran can only escalate into a wider war that would involve far too much chaos to control.

Favorite Quote - "I just fucking love outer space, it has all those planets and stars and shit." - Mister Obvious 2009

"There are two key 'exit stations' for Israel to back down on its threat: A meeting between Netanyahu and Obama in September and a joint U.S.-Israeli military exercise in October."

Any thoughts from the connected posters among us, if this is serious or not ?

Quoting: ^àTOn^

Coming from haaretz and knowing the disinformation, not likely. Bibi may not even meet with Obahmah. he may strike earlier. Look at what Obahmah is doing:

Report: U.S. scales back joint military exercise with Israel

[link to www.haaretz.com] Time Magazine reports number of American troops in mid-October exercise to be cut by two-thirds, in what a senior Israeli official says is a message of mistrust conveyed by Washington.

My opinion remains that Israeli concerns will be far more focused and immediate. I maintain my belief that Iran is not the primary short term target of choice for the IDF.

I think it is in their interests to remove the 'clear and present danger' of Hezbollah first. While some concern is certainly valid for the NE border as well as their southern border, somewhat diminished in recent days, the primary threat is within Lebanon. Remove it and the card house falls down.

Deployments of new systems center around the Hezbollah threat and it is far more doable than a total regional war. Some will believe that attacking Hezbollah must equal a regional conflagration, but I do not believe other states would join the fray if it were a convincing Israeli offensive. The concern then is whether Israel CAN convincingly engage with minimal political fall out and can win. The last round was a draw.

Anything short of liquidation of Hezbollah seems outside the norm of Israeli strategy and while boldness is a signature theme, they also normally choose smaller far more executable quick operations that maximize gains and minimize risk. Total war is not a choice I expect them to make. An attack on Iran can only escalate into a wider war that would involve far too much chaos to control.

Quoting: D. Bunker

I have always been a proponent of taking care of the Hezbollah with massive force. If Iran gets into it, more justification for an attack on Iran and perhaps the US would then defend Israel . . . maybe not right now!

My opinion remains that Israeli concerns will be far more focused and immediate. I maintain my belief that Iran is not the primary short term target of choice for the IDF.

I think it is in their interests to remove the 'clear and present danger' of Hezbollah first. While some concern is certainly valid for the NE border as well as their southern border, somewhat diminished in recent days, the primary threat is within Lebanon. Remove it and the card house falls down.

Deployments of new systems center around the Hezbollah threat and it is far more doable than a total regional war. Some will believe that attacking Hezbollah must equal a regional conflagration, but I do not believe other states would join the fray if it were a convincing Israeli offensive. The concern then is whether Israel CAN convincingly engage with minimal political fall out and can win. The last round was a draw.

Anything short of liquidation of Hezbollah seems outside the norm of Israeli strategy and while boldness is a signature theme, they also normally choose smaller far more executable quick operations that maximize gains and minimize risk. Total war is not a choice I expect them to make. An attack on Iran can only escalate into a wider war that would involve far too much chaos to control.

Quoting: D. Bunker

I agree with Iran is not the primary short term target of choice for the IDF.

But, in that blurr of fighting against Hamas and sinai border terrorists, and with that all out war in Syria, Israel needs to take one thing into account:

She will never be jugded the same way as surrounding arab countries.

The reason is, that western countries with all their thinking of a stable and peace, ecological and multicultural world, focus on Israel as their own nexus of achievement of their own ideologies and dreams.

That is not a problem of Israel neither they are to blame. The blame is on those people denying their own inner politics failures and shifting to "the global reason why they failed".

The failure to adjust illusion and ideology to real politics leads always to look for someone else to blame. It was always like that, it seems to be human nature, but there are other people not acting in that manner, but few.

In either case, Israel would be very ill advised, to start a war. The leftist are on the rise here, in the US; the fallout could be very bad.

Israel needs to be smart, very smart, thinking larger than others, taking decisions accordingly, and she needs to be always 2 steps ahead in military things.

Looks like the nuke doesn't do it anymore, there needs to be something else.

"There are two key 'exit stations' for Israel to back down on its threat: A meeting between Netanyahu and Obama in September and a joint U.S.-Israeli military exercise in October."

Any thoughts from the connected posters among us, if this is serious or not ?

Quoting: ^àTOn^

Coming from haaretz and knowing the disinformation, not likely. Bibi may not even meet with Obahmah. he may strike earlier. Look at what Obahmah is doing:

Report: U.S. scales back joint military exercise with Israel

[link to www.haaretz.com] Time Magazine reports number of American troops in mid-October exercise to be cut by two-thirds, in what a senior Israeli official says is a message of mistrust conveyed by Washington.

Quoting: MIL MAN

These attitudes of the U.S. government are catching me by surprise. I did not expect Obama's opposition to the plans of containing Iranian nuclear project would be so strong to the point of change military agreements with Israel.